[PATCH] rust: pci: fix incorrect platform references in doc comments

[PATCH] rust: pci: fix incorrect platform references in doc comments

[Rahul Rameshbabu]

Substitute 'platform' with 'pci' where appropriate in the comments.

Signed-off-by: Rahul Rameshbabu <sergeantsagara@protonmail.com>
Fixes: 1bd8b6b2c5d3 ("rust: pci: add basic PCI device / driver abstractions")
Fixes: 18ebb25dfa18 ("rust: pci: implement Driver::unbind()")
---
 rust/kernel/pci.rs | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/rust/kernel/pci.rs b/rust/kernel/pci.rs
index 887ee611b553..658e806a5da7 100644
--- a/rust/kernel/pci.rs
+++ b/rust/kernel/pci.rs
@@ -240,11 +240,11 @@ pub trait Driver: Send {
 
     /// PCI driver probe.
     ///
-    /// Called when a new platform device is added or discovered.
-    /// Implementers should attempt to initialize the device here.
+    /// Called when a new pci device is added or discovered. Implementers should
+    /// attempt to initialize the device here.
     fn probe(dev: &Device<device::Core>, id_info: &Self::IdInfo) -> Result<Pin<KBox<Self>>>;
 
-    /// Platform driver unbind.
+    /// PCI driver unbind.
     ///
     /// Called when a [`Device`] is unbound from its bound [`Driver`]. Implementing this callback
     /// is optional.

base-commit: 099381a08db3539c6aab6616c94d7950d74fcd2d
-- 
2.47.2

Re: [PATCH] rust: pci: fix incorrect platform references in doc comments

[Miguel Ojeda]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 7:26 PM Rahul Rameshbabu
<sergeantsagara@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
> Fixes: 1bd8b6b2c5d3 ("rust: pci: add basic PCI device / driver abstractions")
> Fixes: 18ebb25dfa18 ("rust: pci: implement Driver::unbind()")

These do not point to the same set of stable releases -- one cannot be
backported to 6.16. In these cases, it is best to split the fix into
two.

And in the one that can be, you probably want to add Cc: stable so
that Greg's bot doesn't detect it :)

Thanks!

Cheers,
Miguel

Re: [PATCH] rust: pci: fix incorrect platform references in doc comments

[Rahul Rameshbabu]

On Sat, 13 Sep, 2025 21:08:46 +0200 "Miguel Ojeda" <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 7:26 PM Rahul Rameshbabu
> <sergeantsagara@protonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fixes: 1bd8b6b2c5d3 ("rust: pci: add basic PCI device / driver abstractions")
>> Fixes: 18ebb25dfa18 ("rust: pci: implement Driver::unbind()")
>
> These do not point to the same set of stable releases -- one cannot be
> backported to 6.16. In these cases, it is best to split the fix into
> two.
>
> And in the one that can be, you probably want to add Cc: stable so
> that Greg's bot doesn't detect it :)

Thanks Miguel! Just sent out the two patches.

>
> Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Miguel

Re: [PATCH] rust: pci: fix incorrect platform references in doc comments

[Manivannan Sadhasivam]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 09:08:46PM GMT, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 7:26 PM Rahul Rameshbabu
> <sergeantsagara@protonmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Fixes: 1bd8b6b2c5d3 ("rust: pci: add basic PCI device / driver abstractions")
> > Fixes: 18ebb25dfa18 ("rust: pci: implement Driver::unbind()")
> 
> These do not point to the same set of stable releases -- one cannot be
> backported to 6.16. In these cases, it is best to split the fix into
> two.
> 
> And in the one that can be, you probably want to add Cc: stable so
> that Greg's bot doesn't detect it :)
> 

Why should a spelling fix be backported to stable? The stable kernel rules
explicitly states that these kind of fixes should *not* be backported:

  - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, whitespace
    cleanups, etc).

I will suggest to Cc: <stable+noautosel@kernel.org> to make the tools skip this
patch instead.

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்

Re: [PATCH] rust: pci: fix incorrect platform references in doc comments

[Miguel Ojeda]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 7:29 AM Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Why should a spelling fix be backported to stable? The stable kernel rules
> explicitly states that these kind of fixes should *not* be backported:
>
>   - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, whitespace
>     cleanups, etc).

I am aware, but the stable team has autoselected a similar fix in the
past (and I asked them about it, precisely because of the rules
above).

For typos outside doc comments, I wouldn't tag it (but they may still
autoselect it).

For typos in rendered docs like this one, especially one that is not
just a spelling one (like this one), I think it is OK either way, and
a bit more worth it since these are meant to be rendered unlike
implementation comments.

Thus, since this one was in the fuzzy line, I suggested it so that the
contributor avoided Greg's bot when detecting the missing tag.

As for noautosel, I wouldn't do that -- they want them sometimes,
after all. Instead, I would reserve it for things that really
shouldn't be picked for a given reason.

I hope that clarifies a bit.

Cheers,
Miguel

Re: [PATCH] rust: pci: fix incorrect platform references in doc comments

[Manivannan Sadhasivam]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 08:28:30AM GMT, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 7:29 AM Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Why should a spelling fix be backported to stable? The stable kernel rules
> > explicitly states that these kind of fixes should *not* be backported:
> >
> >   - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, whitespace
> >     cleanups, etc).
> 
> I am aware, but the stable team has autoselected a similar fix in the
> past (and I asked them about it, precisely because of the rules
> above).
> 
> For typos outside doc comments, I wouldn't tag it (but they may still
> autoselect it).
> 
> For typos in rendered docs like this one, especially one that is not
> just a spelling one (like this one), I think it is OK either way, and
> a bit more worth it since these are meant to be rendered unlike
> implementation comments.
> 
> Thus, since this one was in the fuzzy line, I suggested it so that the
> contributor avoided Greg's bot when detecting the missing tag.
> 
> As for noautosel, I wouldn't do that -- they want them sometimes,
> after all. Instead, I would reserve it for things that really
> shouldn't be picked for a given reason.
> 
> I hope that clarifies a bit.
> 

Fair enough!

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்